- (1.) Heard. Order dated November 16, 2010, 1 dismissing the writ petition for non-prosecution, is recalled. C.W. P. No. 3200 of 1993
(2.) The writ petition challenges order of assessment dated June 29, 1991 2 passed by the revisional authority under the provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (for short, ''the Act''), revising the order of assessment passed by the Assessing Authority to the extent of holding that rate of tax applicable to sale of parched groundnuts would be general rate and not the rate applicable to groundnuts, which were declared goods. The Petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act and for the assessment year 1982-83, it filed returns, on the basis of which assessment order dated November 16, 1983 was passed. On the sale of groundnuts, rate of tax applicable to the declared goods was applied. The revisional authority exercised suo motu revisional power on the ground that parched groundnuts were different from the groundnuts and were, thus, separate commodities. The relevant observations are: The following judgments prove that parch groundnuts are different commodity from the groundnuts: 'Dewan Chand Chaman Lal v. State of Punjab, 1977 39 STC 75. Groundnuts and parched groundnuts are not the same goods for the purposes of Section 4(2A) of the PunjabGeneral Sales Tax Act, 1948 but are commercially different commodities. Groundnuts are undoubtedly seeds and since oil is extracted out of them they are oil-seeds ; They are understood as such in common parlance. Avadh Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer, 1973 AIR(SC) 2440, Avadh Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer, 1968 21 STC 295 affirmed and Hans Raj Choudri v. J S. Rajyana, Excise and Taxation Officer, 1967 19 STC 489 and Commissioner of Sales v. Bakhat Rai & Co, 1966 18 STC 285 overruled): Dewan Chand Chaman Lal v. State of Punjab, 1977 39 STC 75 , Hans Raj Choudhri v. J.S. Rajyana, Excise and Taxation Officer, 1967 19 STC 489 , overruled groundnuts are oil seed from which oil is extracted and are not edible nuts. State of West Bengal v. Lal Chand Aggarwalla,1973 77 CalWN 910 . Groundnuts-taxable when sold to a miller or last sale miller also doing business of sales of groundnuts-purchased by him may be for extracting oil or for sale groundnuts sold to him for resale-not taxable. Nabi Oil Mills v. Commercial Tax Officer, 1977 40 STC 118 When groundnuts are fried, the germinating property of kernel is lost. Most of the oil content, if not all, is alsolost, fried groundnuts is not, therefore an oil seed. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tiruchirapalli v. R. Kuppuswamy Chettiar, 1976 38 STC 587 As the dealer is dealing in the sale of parch groundnuts thus tax at the general rate is levied. Taxable turnover comes to Rs. 81,307 as per assessment order and admitted by the dealer. Tax at four per cent (as tax at four per cent already levied in the original assessment order) levied comes to Rs. 3,252.25. Surcharge assessed thereon at two per cent... Comes to Rs. 3,317.29. The order is modified to this extent.
(3.) On appeal, the said order was affirmed by the Tribunal as under: I have considered the submissions of the parties and have also seen the facts on record and the judgments relied upon by the parties. I am inclined to agree with the contention of the District Attorney that the parched groundnut is not a declared good and is commercially a different commodity from the unparched groundnut which is a commodity used as 'oil seed' within the meaning of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Therefore, the parched groundnut is certainly leviable to tax at the general rate of tax as has been held by the revisional authority. However, in these cases it is not clear whether the Appellant has sold parched groundnut or unparched groundnut. This fact can easily be gone into by the Assessing Authority from the books of accounts of the Appellant. In the situation, it would be fair and appropriate, if these cases are remanded to the Assessing Authority to decide these cases in the light of the observations made above after going through the record and account books of the Appellant. Accordingly, the cases are remanded to the Assessing Authority for fresh decision after giving full opportunity to the Appellant for production for the books of account and other material to substantiate his claim.;